Some potential pushbacks - Scarlett

 One of the arguments that Professor Toole makes which particularly fascinates me is how the function of ideology might be understood as justifying the status quo, or the “myth-maker” (4). Because ideology can “represent the social as natural,” an appropriate and powerful ideology critique is crucial in the sense that an ideology can represent social reality, but distort people’s perception of reality by representing that social reality as natural and inevitable (5). Professor Toole suggests standpoint epistemology as ideology critique which stands from the perspective of the marginalized population who she argues to have a “cleared-eyed assessment”. According to Professor Toole, the members of the oppressed groups are less likely to fool themselves and allow themselves to be brainwashed by the ruling ideology (8). I definitely agree with her arguments that I reiterated above, but I would also love to offer some points of pushback that I think we can discuss more.

1. The development of consciousness

In Marx’s account which Professor Toole also refers to, the development of consciousness is a product of satisfying material circumstances, instead of the other way around. Professor Toole further elaborates that since the oppressed class is already oppressed enough, it is less likely that we would not want a change. However, I would like to argue that the oppressed groups are more concerned about whether they can satisfy material circumstances for them to survive; and if they are oppressed to a point that their basic subsistence needs cannot be fulfilled, all they want would be to survive which might mean giving up some cleared-eyed consciousness, complying, and securing basic living conditions. For example, in the French Revolution, leaders of the Third Estate were mainly the bourgeoisie and many active protests were led by students instead of workers. I am not suggesting that the bourgeoisie are better representatives of the oppressed workers’ voices. But, I do think that if someone is materialistically oppressed to an extent, it will demand the bourgeoisie, like in the French Revolution, who are less oppressed to step up and be the rejection against ideologies.

2. censorship

I have experienced a great deal of censorship growing up in China. Journalism and the media are so distorted and reconfigured that we are only allowed to see what the government wants us to. I have been exposed to many different voices due to my liberal family culture, but many kids don’t. They grow up in a culture where sex is taboo and patriarchy is justified. These stigmas are so entrenched in some people’s minds that even though they are exposed to more diverse information later on in their lives, the implicit biases implanted in their minds can easily distort their development of a “correct consciousness”. I have heard people who argue against patriarchy that because women are so suppressed to be stay-home mothers by society's expectations, to fight back against patriarchy, men had to be stay-home fathers instead. To me, this is another form of gender injustice, and might negatively affect the objectiveness of “consciousness-raising” (8). This novel of gender injustice against males is in fact induced the long-standing immersion in a patriarchal societal structure. Thus, these people might think they are “clear-eyed” in fighting against patriarchy—they are not. They are furthering their, and society’s, censored and oppressed view on gender equality.